There are Free Lunches Statement of Intentions

There are Free Lunches: Behavioral Clues to Live Happy in the Economic World is a blog that intends to present updated and relevant information about the "hidden" and only recently uncovered dimensions of the economic science: the behavioral factors. With this blog we intend to promote in Europe and in the rest of the World, the top research articles and perspectives on behavioral economics, decision making, consumer behavior, and general behavioral science. We aim to be followed by journalists, academics, managers, civil servants, and everyone who wishes to improve their daily interaction with the economic world and consequently, their lives' happiness.

Friday, 16 September 2011

Self-delusion a winning survival strategy, study suggests (via World Science)

Har­bor­ing a mis­tak­enly in­flat­ed be­lief that we can easily meet chal­lenges or win con­flicts is ac­tu­ally good for us, new re­sults from sim­ula­t­ions sug­gest.

Pub­lished in the re­search jour­nal Na­ture Sept. 14, the re­search in­di­cates that over­con­fi­dence of­ten br­ings re­wards, as long as “spoils” of con­flict are large com­pared with the costs of com­pet­ing for them.

Over­con­fi­dence can br­ing suc­cess in sports, busi­ness or even war, the au­thors say. But they cau­tion that this bold ap­proach al­so risks wreak­ing ever-great­er hav­oc. They cite the 2008 fi­nan­cial crash and the 2003 Iraq war as just two ex­am­ples of when over­con­fi­dence back­fired.

“The mod­el shows that over­con­fi­dence can plau­sibly evolve in wide range of en­vi­ron­ments, as well as the situa­t­ions in which it will fail. The ques­tion now is how to chan­nel hu­man over­con­fi­dence so we can ex­ploit its ben­e­fits while avoid­ing oc­ca­sion­al dis­as­ters,” said study co-author Dom­i­nic John­son of the Uni­vers­ity of Ed­in­burgh.

The re­search­ers, from the Uni­vers­ity of Ed­in­burgh and the Uni­vers­ity of Cal­i­for­nia, San Die­go, used a math­e­mat­i­cal mod­el to sim­ulate the ef­fects of over­con­fi­dence over genera­t­ions. Their mod­el pit­ted “o­verconfident” play­ers against play­ers with ac­cu­rate per­cep­tions of their own abil­i­ties, and oth­ers that were un­der­con­fi­dent.

If you have 2 minutes, you can check everything here:

No comments:

Post a Comment